• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Another Immortals Handbook thread

What do you wish from the Immortals Handbook?

  • I want to see rules for playing Immortals

    Votes: 63 73.3%
  • I want to see more Epic Monsters

    Votes: 33 38.4%
  • I want to see Artifacts and epic Magic Items

    Votes: 38 44.2%
  • I want to see truly Epic Spells and Immortal Magic

    Votes: 50 58.1%
  • I want Immortal Adventures and Campaigns Ideas

    Votes: 44 51.2%
  • I want to see a Pantheon (or two) detailed

    Votes: 21 24.4%
  • I want to see something else (post below)

    Votes: 3 3.5%
  • I don't like Epic/Immortal gaming

    Votes: 4 4.7%

  • Poll closed .
Upper_Krust said:
Hello there Ulitharid Lord - and welcome to the boards! :)

Thanks!

U_K, when are you going to update your website with the revised Antimagic rules? I've tried revising Antimagic rules here (you have to scroll down), and I'd like to see what you've done to Antimagic.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


UK I have been thinking and would like to suggest (Although I may be killed for this) that the bestiary in print would be best served as POD until all 3 are finished, and then as one real good book. Nice big hardcover. Easily worth $50 if you get it right.
 

Anyone here have an idea what a ring of wizardry that allows the Automatic Metamagic Capacity to be used ought to be priced at?
 


Sledge said:
Anyone here have an idea what a ring of wizardry that allows the Automatic Metamagic Capacity to be used ought to be priced at?

Given that it would grant at least one bonus epic feat, I'd say just over 200k at least, raised in exponential intervals per feat it grants. i.e. a ring of AMC +1 could be 250,000 gp, +2 could be 500,000 gp, +3 could be 1,000,000 gp, +4 ~ 2,000,000, etc. The way I see it, the epic ring selection is crap and could stand to see a few items really worth the adjective. Even if my pricing suggestion is rebuked, the ring idea is a good one, Sledge.
 

Pssthpok actually I'm putting it on a character that already has Automatic Metamagic Capacity. As is the "epic" rings of wizardry are great at say 20th level, but at level 39 they are going to be the equivalent of this guy's cantrips. Better because of the base spell allowed mind you, but still weak compared to what he normally has.
 

Ulitharid_Lord said:

Don't mention it mate, happy to help! :)

Ulitharid_Lord said:
U_K, when are you going to update your website with the revised Antimagic rules?

As soon as I can upload my website again.

Ulitharid_Lord said:
I've tried revising Antimagic rules here (you have to scroll down), and I'd like to see what you've done to Antimagic.

Anti-magic is potentially one problem with high-level gaing that I would fix and integrate as standard rather than only as an optional rule.
 


Heya Sledge matey! :)

Sledge said:
UK I have been thinking and would like to suggest (Although I may be killed for this) that the bestiary in print would be best served as POD until all 3 are finished, and then as one real good book. Nice big hardcover. Easily worth $50 if you get it right.

Thats the plan. 320 page epic bestiary with 153 monsters.

Sledge said:
Anyone here have an idea what a ring of wizardry that allows the Automatic Metamagic Capacity to be used ought to be priced at?

Pssthpok said:
Given that it would grant at least one bonus epic feat, I'd say just over 200k at least, raised in exponential intervals per feat it grants. i.e. a ring of AMC +1 could be 250,000 gp, +2 could be 500,000 gp, +3 could be 1,000,000 gp, +4 ~ 2,000,000, etc. The way I see it, the epic ring selection is crap and could stand to see a few items really worth the adjective. Even if my pricing suggestion is rebuked, the ring idea is a good one, Sledge.

I don't really think its necessarily 'that' powerful, but it is technically epic.

I suspect you could have:

+1 = 10,000
+2 = 40,000
+3 = 90,000
+4 = 160,000
+5 = 250,000
+6 = 360,000
+7 = 490,000
etc.

Of course the above would need tested to its (il)logical conclusions.

+10 = 1 million...30th-level to own
+20 = 4 million...42nd-level to own
+30 = 9 million...52nd-level to own
+40 = 16 million...61st-level to own
+50 = 25 million...70th-level to own
+60 = 36 million...79th-level to own
+70 = 49 million...88th-level to own
+80 = 64 million...98th-level to own
+90 = 81 million...107th-level to own
+100 = 100 million = 115th-level to own

At first glance, the above seems fairly well balanced. However the question is whether or not the above would be stackable with the feat!? By default maybe not. A stackable version might retail for bonus squared x 20,000 instead of x 10,000 as listed above.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top